This study has important implications for microworlds such as Logo, HyperGami, and Newton's World, which use interaction to learn spatial mental models for science, math, geometry, etc. This study tested the hypothesis that interactively rotating (dragging) virtual shapes primes mental rotation. The independent variable was observation vs. interaction: a) watching an animation of a shape rotating, versus b) manually rotating a shape on the computer. The dependent variable was mental rotation of the same shape. Two age groups, 9-year-olds and college undergraduates participated. For 9-year-olds, the interactive group mentally rotated significantly more accurately and faster than the observational. Therefore, interaction primed mental rotation. For the college undergraduates, the interactive group mentally rotated significantly more accurately, but significantly slower than the observational group. This suggests that the interaction disrupted a routine process, causing undergraduates to switch strategies. Results from both age groups reinforce the educational value of more naturalistic interaction with virtual shapes, i.e., dragging is better than clicking.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BattistaM. T. (1990). Spatial visualization and gender differences in high school geometry. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 21(11), 47–60.
2.
CampbellD. T., & StanleyJ. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally & Company.
3.
ClementsD. H., & BurnsB. A. (1999, April). Students' development of strategies for turn and angle measurement. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
4.
CookT., & CampbellD. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally & Company.
5.
DenisM., & KosslynS. N. (1999). Scanning visual images: A window to the mind. Cahier de Psychologie Cognitive/Current Psychology of Cognition, 18, 409–465.
6.
EmbretsonS. E. (1987). Improving the measurement of spatial aptitude by dynamic testing. Intelligence, 11, 333–358.
GreenfieldP. M. (1994). Cognitive effects of video games: Guest editor's introduction, video games as cultural artifacts. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 15, 3–12.
9.
GibsonJ. J. (1962). Observations on active touch. Psychological Review, 69, 477–491.
10.
GibsonJ. J. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
11.
GibsonJ. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
12.
GrazianoM. S. A., & GrossC. G. (1995). The representation of extrapersonal space: A possible role for bimodal, visuo-tactile neurons. In GazzanigaM. S. (Ed.), The cognitive neurosciences (pp. 1021–1034). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
13.
HasherL., & ZacksR. T. (1979). Automatic and effortful processes in memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 3, 356–388.
14.
HumphreysL. G.LubinskiD., & YaoG. (1993). Utility of predicting group membership and the role of spatial visualization in becoming an engineer, physical scientist, or artist. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(2), 250–261.
15.
JagacinskiR. J. (1977). A qualitative look at feedback control as a style of describing behavior. Human Factors, 19, 331–347.
16.
KleinI.ParadisA.PolineJ.KosslynS. M., & Le BihanD. (2000) Transient activity in the human calcarine cortex during visual-mental imagery: An event-related fMRI study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(Suppl 2), 15–23.
17.
KosslynS. M. (1980). Image and Mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
18.
KosslynS. M. (1994). Image and Brain: The Resolution of the Imagery Debate. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
KosslynS.BallT., & ReiserB. (1978). Visual images preserve metric spatial information: Evidence from studies of image scanning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, Human Perception and Performance, 4, 47–60.
21.
KosslynS. M.BehrmannM., & JeannerodM. (1995). The cognitive neuroscience of mental imagery. Neuropsychologia, 33, 1335–1344.
22.
KosslynS. M.PinkerS.SmithG., & ShwartzS. (1979). On the demystification of mental imagery. Behavior & Brain Sciences, 2(4), 535–581.
23.
LadavasE.di PellegrinoG.FarneA., & ZeloniG. (1998). Neuropsychological evidence of an integrated visuotactile representation of peripersonal space in humans. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10(5), 581–589.
24.
LinnM. C., & PetersenA. C. (1985). Emergence and characterization of sex differences in spatial ability: A meta-analysis. Child Development, 56, 1479–1498.
25.
McNamaraT. P. (1985). Mental representations of spatial relations. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 87–121.
26.
McNamaraT. P.AltarribaJ.BendeleM.JohnsonS. C., & ClaytonK. N. (1989). Constraints on priming in spatial memory: Naturally learned versus experimentally learned environments. Memory & Cognition, 17, 444–453.
27.
McNamaraT. P.RatcliffR., & McKoonG. (1984). The mental representation of knowledge acquired from maps. Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 723–732.
28.
McGeeM. G. (1978). Human spatial abilities: Psychometric studies and environmental, genetic, hormonal, and neurological influences. Psychological Review, 86, 889–918.
29.
MelletE.PetitL.MazoyerB.DenisM., & TzourioN. (1998). Reopening the mental imagery debate: Lessons from functional anatomy. NeuroImage, 8(2), 129–139.
30.
OkagakiL., & FrenschP. A. (1994). Effects of video game playing on measures of spatial performance: Gender effects in late adolescence. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 15(1), 33–58.
31.
OlkunS. (2003). Comparing computer versus concrete manipulative in learning 2D geometry. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 22(1), 43–56. Available online at: http://dl.aace.org/11575.
32.
PallrandG. J., & SeeberF. (1984). Spatial ability and achievement in introductory physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21, 507–516.
33.
PearsonJ. L., & FergusonL. R. (1989). Gender differences in patterns of spatial ability, environmental cognition, and math and English achievement in late adolescence. Adolescence, 24, 421–431.
34.
PribylJ. R., & BodnerG. M. (1987). Spatial ability and its role in organic chemistry: A study of four organic courses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 229–240.
35.
PylyshynZ. W. (1973). What the mind's eye tells the mind's brain: A critique of mental imagery. Psychological Bulletin, 80, 1–25.
36.
SalzmanM. C.DedeC.LoftinR. B., & ChenJ. (2003). The design and evaluation of virtual reality-based learning environments. Accepted for publication in Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments.
37.
ShepardR. N., & CooperL. A. (1982). Mental images and their transformations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
38.
SchultzK. (1991). The contribution of solution strategy to spatial performance. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 45(4), 474–491.
39.
SmithI. M. (1964). Spatial ability: Its educational and social significance. San Diego, CA: Robert R. Knapp.
40.
SmithG. G. (1998). Computers, computer games, active control and spatial visualization, strategy. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona.
41.
SmithG. G., & OlkunS. (2003). Leap before you look: Interact then mentally rotate— spatial skills. Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2003: World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications, USA, 4, 2798–2803.
42.
TootellR. B.SilvermanM. S.SwitkesE., & ValoisR. L. (1982, Nov. 26). Deoxyglucose analysis of retinotopic organization in primate striate context. Science, 218, 902–904.
43.
TorresI. J., & RazN. (1964). Toward the neural basis of verbal priming: A cognitive-neuropsychological synthesis. Neuropsychology Review, 4, 1–30.
44.
WilliamsJ. D.RipponG.StoneB. M., & AnnettJ. (1995). Psychophysiological correlates of dynamic imagery, British Journal of Psychology, 86(2), 283–300.
